The Federal Circuit just announced in MCM Portfolio LLC v. Hewlett Packard, No. 2015-1091, that the IPR process is not unconstitutional. Appellants argued that IPRs should be held by an Article III court, and the court rejected this argument. The court noted that Supreme Court precedent generally allows Congress to devise expert and inexpensive ways through administrative adjudication to deal with a class of questions of fact. The court also noted that it is bound by Federal Circuit precedent concerning the constitutionality of an administrative process to adjudicate reexamination requests. According to the court, IPRs are like reexamination proceedings and similarly do not require adjudication in Article III courts. The court also rejected the right-to-jury clam claim on the basis of Supreme Court precedent, holding that the Seventh Amendment poses no barrier to the PTO adjudicating IPRs without a jury.
So for all you folks looking to get out of work early today . . .